Can we have the hellhound gearset available to buy with Trophy Crystals?

[Araxes]

Great, glad we agree.

Yeah, i absolutely Do. If EVERYTHING unobtainable becomes available and earnable in Game, including Legacy Mounts and the Tattoo, i got no issue. If only SOME things become available again, i would be one of the first in the Forum War that would "1000%" occur.

Equality? Yes, but for Everyone, not just Some.

[Canadane]

The first 4 Seasons were okay. There were not many cheating players cause the game wasn't as big as it is now and there were not many cheats "developed". After that, third party stuff grew rapidly. Especially during the Shadowbringers Expac.

WoW refugees were a mistake.

[Burmecia]

WoW refugees were a mistake.

hush, don't say the silent part out loud

[Reinhardt_Azureheim]

Prefacing this as I reduce your wall of text to something more pleasing to read - please just string sentences together like everyone else. This is a tough read.

How do you even know it wasn't a majority. Cannot Answer a Claim without evidence to back it up with another supposition. One says majority(of the top) others said minority(of the top) Where's the info that it was a minority then? Cause you also need to prove. Otherwise the fact many have even talked about it becomes reality.

They made the initial claim and I asked for proof because I do not see Top 100 players in the same way they do. They have, by definition, the burden of proof for being the first to claim their argument to be true. As I said, I do not deal in absolutes and I did not deny the existence of cheaters and cheats. All I said was that the existence of them does not automatically translate to the majority having done it.

You on the other hand are now arguing that because I have done so that the burden of proof falls onto me and ridding it off them. That is called "argumentum ad ignorantiam" - argument in ignorance (or appeal to ignorance), a logical fallacy to shift the burden of proof unjustly. Please read up on the sources before you do try to argue in their favour like this.

Sources
Burden of Proof:
Cambridge Dictionary: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dic...urden-of-proof
Oxford Reference: https://www.oxfordreference.com/disp...10803095535899

Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam
LogicallyFallacious: https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/...from-Ignorance
Oxford Reference: https://www.oxfordreference.com/disp...97583104-e-259

TL;DR: It is not on me to prove when I have neither fully denied their point nor made an absolute claim, especially not when they have made the first claim.

Simply put, at a certain point, exclusivity can go get trashed.
[1] Should the new battlepass/series system not return?
[2] should fomo be a thing?
[3] No, if anything, having the newer items. Should be the Merit, rather than having old items that no one who got it day one would care for, except for petty and vapid exclusivity.
[4] It again, does not matter any more. No one cares if you were on a leader board at a time when the games systems were less mature, thus easily gameable.

[1] This is about Top 100 "The Feast", not post-6.1 Series/Battlepass rewards. Nobody claimed that they should not return, in fact hundreds if not thousands of posts were probably made across all language forums that they should return - if for nothing but the initial presentation, that Trophy Crystals should allow you to buy Series rewards when you missed them at the time. Please don't pad your post and argumentative stance with outrageous claims nobody made. This is the "I can't believe he hates waffles" fallacy again where someone said "I like pancakes".

[2] Should it be? No, but it is and it is working. We can either vote with our wallet and unsub during such periods or don't. Also there is a difference between legacy/performance based "fomo" and "we are asking you to do these 5 quests to get some rewards"-fomo. The former actually bears meaning to their respective origin and/or had to be earned in competition, the latter purely exists to drive subscriptions.

[3] Nobody argued against having newer items. Also it's a bit dismissive to say they would not care for it except for petty and vapid exclusivity. As one of them who holds one of Light's S19 armoursets, all we ask for is for the original achievement to still be readable by any small margin ingame. At most I'd ask for the rerelease to not be "too" easily earnable to at least humble the original obtainment method of Ranked PvP in general.

[4] Frankly I and various other Top 100 players have made the opposite experiences where players would approach us and actually be amazed by what we accomplished ingame. Also, the current system is arguably more gameable due to the inability to drop lower than Platinum 4. We did not have this safeguard back then, nor was the game any easier than it currently is. In many ways it was more difficult, including going unnoticed as a wintrader (given the most popular role for this was most likely Healer).

And who's fault was it that there even is Legacy Players in the first place? The main point of theirs, is that 2.0-> onwards items have no value being gatekept. And eventually at some point 1.0 players will also need to let go of the past. No one on this topic will agree on what should be available to all. And everyone will agree things like the Tattoo should stay special.(but at least AccWide to those who were at the time. Present)

That is a vile argument. "Who's fault was it that there even is legacy players"? Legacy players stuck around when the game was at the worst stage ever. They have every single right to their exclusivity and benefits as the game's first supporters. Just because some corporate megalomaniacs absolutely doozied 1.X due to hysterically terrible decisionmaking regarding the engines and being "the one at fault" does not mean legacy players should have to forfeit their exclusivity, good grief.

This I'd about items from 2.0 onwards. And their exclusivity is as pleasing as pixelation.

You have yet to give a reason why there would be value in keeping things exclusive either, that isn't some petty response from players who like "Have/Have Not" situations.

No real Objective, even being at the time and day it was active first, loses its value. Hence why it's rotation and return has more value to increase Duty counts. and other Game Experience improving outcomes.

First of all, we can turn the "petty response from players who like have/have not" the opposite direction. The main reason people are mad about the exclusivity of these items is because they can't have them, not because they necessarily want them. They like to have access and don't like others having what they don't have.

Second, the exclusivity of Top 100 PvP is literally in the name and no amount of shaming players at the time for a set of bad actors will negate what a lot of players had to go through and had to actually hone their gameplay for to compete for top reach the rank they did. Argue wintraders and cheaters (at the time this was fairly underdeveloped btw) all you want, it was a competition and the legit players want to keep at least some form of representation for their achievement.

On your last point, the only way this would have value is if it incentivized a duty type that actually would benefit from it. If it is completely obtainable by doing Frontlines/Rival Wings and Casual CC, then you lost the plot because neither of these two modes need additional incentive, therefore there is no value to put them into rotation for a casual currency.

[Boa-Noah]

On your last point, the only way this would have value is if it incentivized a duty type that actually would benefit from it. If it is completely obtainable by doing Frontlines/Rival Wings and Casual CC, then you lost the plot because neither of these two modes need additional incentive, therefore there is no value to put them into rotation for a casual currency.

Except there is value, the same value as there is in the current PVP gear rewards, people who otherwise would never touch PVP are now doing it so they can earn rewards they want, which is entirely the point of the content, even Feast the point of getting top 100 was to get the special gear, mounts, and titles.

Having more rewards for new players to incentivize into getting into PVP is a good thing.

The only possible downside to bringing old Feast rewards into modern PVP is that old Feast players that got those ultra limited rewards won't be as special anymore, is there ANY other downside? Realistically and literally what is a negative for new players being able to earn old rewards? If 'prestige' is the ONLY argument against doing so then there is no merit. If it's for exclusivity then slap a 'Replica' suffix on the returning gear so people who earned it originally don't lose their 'exclusive' status, if that's not good enough then I just think you don't want people to get access to the gear you're clearly very proud of earning.

[Bonoki]

Then we can do the same thing with the legacy Tattoo! Thank you very much.

Man, people acting like spoiled children. Acting all up if they can't have the same pants as the other kid.

You know, I've encountered numerous 1.0 players who've expressed openness to the idea of the Legacy Tattoo being accessible to others. It's worth noting that Legacy players are also rewarded with reduced subscription costs compared to those of every other player at 2.0 and beyond, yet that's not something anyone is asking for.

Didn't Yoshi P also publicly apologize to the legacy 1.X players who obtained this item legitimately fighting Nael back then and admit it was a mistake?

Sorry but I really dislike your take on this, all I read is "mom said it's my turn with the controller now" and completely and utterly disregarding what some players had to go through to obtain what they had.

Your stance reinforces why I firmly believe that reintroducing new top 100 rewards into the game should remain out of consideration indefinitely.

[Boa-Noah]

You know, I've encountered numerous 1.0 players who've expressed openness to the idea of the Legacy Tattoo being accessible to others.

Honestly, full transparency, I'd be totally fine if we could unlock 'legacy' dialogue/tattoo by paying some exorbitant fee, like I'm talking 100$ for an unlock, even that would be better than "No you're not allowed to be the actual Warrior of Light, you're just a fake." like we currently have.

Sure I'd like to pay less for the game but realistically I'm not going to demand SE lower my sub fee indefinitely so I can have a tattoo that doesn't show up on 99% of gear pieces, that would be silly, but I sure would love to be the Warrior of Light that the game is constantly praising me to be when in-universe in-game lore specifically states I'm NOT.

[Nezerius]

WoW refugees were a mistake.

Kinda weird to blame the WoW exodus in ShB for third party plugins, when the groundwork (ACT) was already a thing in ARR.

Might as well blame the XI players that used Windower.

[Reinhardt_Azureheim]

Your stance reinforces why I firmly believe that reintroducing new top 100 rewards into the game should remain out of consideration indefinitely.

Bonoki, not only do I simply do not care about your rigid stance on that matter (I changed mine a while ago), your complete and utter disregard for alternative obtainment methods (within ranked, as I described on page 1 and MANY other threads) of not only old, but also future top 100 rewards speaks volumes.

Frankly, to me it seems you simply don't care about ranked whatsoever, therefore I fail to see why your opinion on anything ranked related should even matter.

[Reinhardt_Azureheim]

Except there is value, the same value as there is in the current PVP gear rewards, people who otherwise would never touch PVP are now doing it so they can earn rewards they want, which is entirely the point of the content, even Feast the point of getting top 100 was to get the special gear, mounts, and titles.

Having more rewards for new players to incentivize into getting into PVP is a good thing.

The only possible downside to bringing old Feast rewards into modern PVP is that old Feast players that got those ultra limited rewards won't be as special anymore, is there ANY other downside? Realistically and literally what is a negative for new players being able to earn old rewards? If 'prestige' is the ONLY argument against doing so then there is no merit. If it's for exclusivity then slap a 'Replica' suffix on the returning gear so people who earned it originally don't lose their 'exclusive' status, if that's not good enough then I just think you don't want people to get access to the gear you're clearly very proud of earning.

Boa-Noah, you are misunderstanding my point.

My personal stance has not been "they should not add this because it has no value". What I am trying to say is that they should readd it, easier to obtain, but not by the measure of playing Frontline and Casual Crystalline Conflict, both of which have a healthy and active playerbase in the first place. My suggestion is, similar how I described it in post #2 of this thread to incentivize the play of ranked PvP, even at low ranks. This includes Bronze.

What I am trying to say is that it is best implemented as a healthy middle ground between the old guard who wants to retain a modicum of the prestige and the new players who want to be encouraged to PvP. Ranked PvP is literally the best place for this, especially if you do this as I explained on page 1.